Agenda item

Proposal: Change of use from dwellinghouses (C3) to educational use (F1) in connection with Kirkstone House School

Location: 22 And 24 School Lane, Baston, PE6 9PD

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions

Proposal: Change of use from dwellinghouses (C3) to educational use (F1) in connection with Kirkstone House School

Location: 22 And 24 School Lane, Baston, PE6 9PD

Recommendation: To authorise the Assistant Director Planning & Growth to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions

Noting comments in the public speaking session by:

Baston Parish Council                       Cllr Clarke

Against                                              Jill Groutage

Together with:

·       Provisions within SKDC Local Plan 2011-2036 (Policy SP6 - Community Services and Facilities and Policy DE1 - Promoting Good Quality Design).

·       National Planning Policy Framework (Section 12 - Achieving well-designed places and Section 9 - Promoting sustainable transport).

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Police.

·       No comments received from Education and Cultural Services (LCC).

·       No comments received from Lincolnshire Fieldpaths Association.

·       No comments received from South Kesteven District Council Footpaths Officer.

·       No comments received from The Ramblers Association.

·       Comments received from LCC Highways and SuDS Support.

·       Comments received from Parish Council.

(Councillor Paul Fellows left the Chamber for this item).

During questions to Public Speakers, Members commented on:

·       Further clarification over main safeguarding issues were requested.

Concerns were raised regarding the proposal having low fencing and little security measures.

The safeguarding of children, teachers and adults was a concern due to 1-1 teaching. The proposal was designed in a way where an adult could be left in a room with a student inside a closed door, which was a serious safeguarding concern. The Applicant’s did not intend on making any adaptations.

There was also a requirement for adults and children to have separate toilet facilities in such settings, this could not be seen on the submitted plans.

·       Confirmation of whether there were empty buildings surrounding the proposal area that could be put to potential use.

It was confirmed that there were empty buildings surrounding the proposal area that could be put to potential use.

The school had 350 places, however, the school only had 108 pupils at present. It was highlighted that there may be current capacity in the existing building for more students as other rooms and buildings within the current grounds were vacant.

·       It was queried as to how long the bungalows had been vacant for.

A Public Speaker estimated that the bungalows had been vacant for 10 years.

·       Other education provisions In Baston were questioned.

It was noted that Baston had a primary school that was nearly up to capacity.

During questions to Officers, Members commented on:

·       What weight should be given to the fact the proposal may take up residential properties, in line with the Council’s policies on new builds. Bungalows were a primary need for housing in the District.

The DM & Enforcement Manager clarified that weight given to a material consideration was at the discretion of the Committee.

The report acknowledged the loss of housing as a relevant material consideration, but consideration should be given to the quantity of houses (two bungalows) in line with the overall housing need of the District.

The Committee were reminded to consider the planning merits on the current use of the buildings by the school, as a community facility or an extension to the existing school. Granting permission would not guarantee the use being implemented.

·       Who the current owners of the two properties were. However, the ownership was unknown and was not relevant to the decision made.

·       The weight of education needs was discussed against housing needs. The Applicant had not demonstrated what type of education the buildings would be used for.

·       Whether more evidence could be requested from the Applicant.

·       The Committee discussed the future need for residential bungalows.

The Council could not compel the current landowner of the buildings to bring the bungalows back into use for residential purposes. This would mean that if the proposal was refused the properties may still stand vacant for a prolonged period of time.

·       That the Applicant (Kirkstone House School) did not have a sixth form facility and only had pupils up to GCSE levels. Members felt this reduced the level of educational need.

(The Committee adjourned for 5 minutes, as a Member wished to receive legal advice).

During debate, Members commented on:

·       Although not a material consideration, it was queried whether any Council Tax would be paid on the properties whilst they were being transferred to educational use.

·       Assessing the application against the Local Plan and housing need.

·       Weight given to the need of the school, due to spare capacity on existing site.

·       Giving less weight to the need of the school due to additional capacity being within the school and therefore, not necessary to lose the bungalows.

It was proposed, seconded and AGREED to authorise the Assistant Director – Planning & Growth to REFUSE planning permission for the following reason:

Whilst the proposed change of use would result in the provision of additional educational facilities, the loss of housing would, on balance, conflict with Policy SD1 of the adopted Local Plan and therefore conflict with the development plan when taken as a whole. The balance of material considerations in this case, including the public benefits associated with the education provision would not outweigh the conflict identified with the development plan.